Jump to content
New Zealand Dentist Blows Whistle on Fluoridation
Dr. Anna Goodwin speaks out about water fluoridation
Dr. Jane Beck speaks out about water fluoridation
Dentist Dr. Lawrie Brett speaks out about water fluoridation
Dentist, Dr. Andrew Harms, former President of the Australian Dental Association, once promoted fluoridation until he read the science. Now, as he explains in this YouTube video, he opposes fluoridation
Dentist and fluoride researcher, Hardy Limeback BSc,PhD,DDS discusses the drawbacks of water fluoridation
Dentist Bill Osmunson also once promoted fluoridation until he read the literature himself. Now he is opposed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ys9q1...
Actually, you really don't know how many dentists are in favor of fluoridation unless you did a closed-ballot vote. According to a Wealthy Dentist survey, 35% of dentists are opposed to fluoridation - extrapolated out to your number of dentists in the US, it would mean that 64,000 dentists oppose fluoridation.
Fluoridation Opposition is Scientific, Respectable & Growing
More than 4,500 professionals (including 343 dentists and 538 MD’s) urge that fluoridation be stopped because fluoridation is ineffective and harmful. See statement: http://www.fluoridealert.org/researchers/professionals-statement/text/
Most dentists are trained to use politics and not science to promote fluoridation, according to Armfield and Melbye in the Journal of the American Dental Association . The researchers write: "Studies of dentists' attitudes about water fluoridation suggest that a lack of knowledge and preparedness are barriers to discussing the topic ... more than one-half of the respondents believed they needed more information and training on the issue.
Armfield and Melbye postulate that: "Dentists' lack of self-efficacy with respect to critically evaluating scientific literature may help to explain their reluctance to promote water fluoridation in their clinical practices." Other studies how dentists don’t keep current on new fluoride science, e.g. this research by Yoder http://tinyurl.com/Yoder
Shelly Gehshan of the Pew Foundation distributed false fluoridation information to The Dalles officials in a 7/2/2013 letter. The most egregious is dismissal of Harvard research linking fluoride to lower IQ. (Grandjean et al)
When Gehshan writes, “the Harvard researchers publicly distanced themselves from the way that anti-fluoride groups were misrepresenting these IQ studies,” she uses an error-laden Wichita KS newspaper article as a reference which some believe was ghost-written by Pew’s fluoridation Public Relations guru. Grandjean states the newspaper never "checked their information with the authors, even though statements were attributed to them."
Grandjean criticized the Wichita paper for deceptively attributing its own conclusions on fluoridation to the Harvard scientists. Fluoridation's potential to produce "chemical brain drain," Grandjean writes, is an issue that "definitely deserves concern."
Grandjean also takes objection to the Wichita paper's claim that the Harvard review only looked at studies that used "very high levels of fluoride."
The truth, Grandjean writes, is that "only 4 of 27 studies" in the Harvard review used the high levels that the Wichita paper described, and "clear differences" in IQ "were found at much lower exposures."
Grandjean identifies fluoride as one of 213 known brain-toxic chemicals that may lower the intelligence of generations of children, in his new book, “Only One Chance”
“Fluorides are known to cause brain toxicity and neurological symptoms in humans,” Grandjean says. He laments that vested interests often manipulate brain-drain research and manufacture uncertainties to wrongly discredit scientists’ conclusions and credibility.
Vested interests caused decades to pass before children were protected from the reported brain-damaging effects of lead. We unnecessarily lost a generation to lead-induced brain damage, reports Grandjean.
We don’t want the same thing to happen with fluoride.
When Grandjean’s research team published a careful review of studies (meta-analysis) linking fluoride to children’s lower IQ, worried fluoridation promoters and regulators immediately and incorrectly claimed that only excessive exposures are toxic, the effect is insignificant, decades of fluoridation would have revealed brain deficits (although nobody looked, yet), and that it was probably lead and arsenic that lowered IQ, not fluoride.
“When such a misleading fuselage is aimed at the authors of a careful meta-analysis of 27 different studies, what would it take to convince critics like that,” asks Grandjean.
37 human studies now link fluoride to children's lowered IQ, some at levels considered safe in the US. See: http://www.fluoridealert.org/articles/iq-facts/ and that no research on fluoride’s human brain effects have ever been conducted in the US
We don’t understand why Pew continues to distort the truth.
View all listings
Last login: Friday, May 8, 2015
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Eagle Newspapers, Inc. All rights reserved.